Franklin Perkins v. Mspb
This text of Franklin Perkins v. Mspb (Franklin Perkins v. Mspb) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Case: 13-3074 Document: 19 Page: 1 Filed: 06/10/2013
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit __________________________
FRANKLIN R. PERKINS, Petitioner,
v. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, Respondent. __________________________
2013-3074 __________________________
Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in No. DA315I120162-I-1. __________________________
ON MOTION __________________________
ORDER
The Department of the Air Force moves to reform the official caption to name the Merit Systems Protection Board as the proper respondent, and to set the due date for the Board’s brief as 21 days from the date of disposition of this motion. Franklin R. Perkins opposes.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 7703(a)(2), the Board is desig- nated as the respondent when the Board’s decision con- cerns the procedure or jurisdiction of the Board. The Case: 13-3074 Document: 19 Page: 2 Filed: 06/10/2013
FRANKLIN PERKINS V. MSPB 2
employing agency is designated as the respondent when the Board reaches the merits of the underlying case. Here, the Board dismissed Perkins’ appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Thus, the Board is the proper respondent in this petition for review. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) The motion to reform the caption is granted. The revised official caption is reflected above.
(2) The Board should calculate the due date for its brief from the date of filing of this order.
FOR THE COURT
/s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk s21
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Franklin Perkins v. Mspb, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/franklin-perkins-v-mspb-cafc-2013.